iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Google's SolarCity Fund: $280 Million Invested In Solar Energy For Private Homes

Google Solarcity Solar Investment

JONATHAN FAHEY   06/14/11 06:25 PM ET   AP

NEW YORK — Google is making its largest investment yet in clean energy in an effort to help private homeowners put solar panels on their rooftops.

The $280 million deal with installer SolarCity is the largest of its kind. SolarCity can use the funds to pay for a solar system that it can offer to residents for no money down. In exchange, customers agree to pay a set price for the power produced by the panels.

Google earns a return on its investment by charging SolarCity interest to use its money and reaping the benefits of federal and local renewable energy tax credits.

"It allows us to put our capital to work in a way that is very important to the founders and to Google, and we found a good business model to support," said Joel Conkling of Google's Green Business Operations in an interview before the company announced the investment Tuesday.

Google co-founder and chief executive Larry Page wants Google's operations to eventually produce no net greenhouse gas emissions. To this end, Google has invested in wind farms in North Dakota, California and Oregon, solar projects in California and Germany, and the early stages of a transmission system off the East coast meant to foster the construction of offshore wind farms. The SolarCity deal brings the total value of these investments to $680 million.

Google, based in Mountain View, Calif., is emerging as one of the biggest corporate users of energy as it continues to build data centers packed with computers that run its search engine and other services.

This type of fund Google is creating is common in the residential solar industry, A typical rooftop solar system costs $25,000 to $30,000, too much for many homeowners to lay out. Instead, solar providers like SolarCity and competitors SunRun and Sungevity can pay for the system with money borrowed from a bank or a specially-designed fund. The resident then pays a set rate for the power generated. The rate is lower than or roughly the same as the local electricity price.

A typical 5-kilowatt system will generate about 7,000 kilowatt-hours of power in a year, or about 60 percent of the typical household's annual use. The homeowner buys whatever remaining electric power he needs from the local utility. The homeowner typically enjoys lower overall power bills and is protected somewhat against potentially higher traditional electricity prices in the future.

Electricity prices have not risen in recent months, unlike gasoline and heating oil. But they're expected to creep up in coming years as the cost of increasingly stringent clean-air regulations are passed on to customers.

These types of programs don't work well in all states or for all homes. In order for both the solar company to make money and the homeowner to save money there must be some combination of high local electric rates, state and local subsidies, and low installation costs.

And, of course, sunshine. A home needs a roof, preferably facing south, that is not shaded by trees or structures.

Google's $280 million is expected to pay for 10,000 rooftop systems that will be installed over the next 18 months. These types of programs originated in California, by far the nation's largest solar market, because the state has offered generous incentives, power prices are high and there is ample sunlight.

In recent months, though, SolarCity and its competitors have announced expansions to other states, and the establishment of new funds to pay for new systems. SolarCity, based in San Mateo, Calif., offers service in Arizona, California, Colorado, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas and Washington, D.C.

SolarCity established a $158 million fund in May while SunRun set up a $200 million fund, both with U.S. Bancorp. SolarCity has now raised $1.3 billion in total. Also last month, Sungevity announced it would offer services through Lowe's stores in eight states.

Customers typically choose to finance their systems. SolarCity says of the 15,000 systems it has installed, 12,000 were financed.

Google's investment generates returns three ways. Google gets a tax credit from the federal government of 30 percent of the cost of the solar projects, in this case $84 million. It also can write off the total value of the systems in the year they are built, an accounting benefit called accelerated depreciation. The value of state and local tax credits also flow to Google.

Finally, SolarCity pays Google interest for the use of the funds through the rates it charges customers, though neither company will say how much.

Google also declined to compare the return on its solar fund with the company's overall profit margin. In 2010, Google earned $8.5 billion on $29.3 billion in sales, a profit margin of 29 percent.

Google investors have questioned investments that have little to do with the company's main Internet businesses and that may be potentially risky or generate lower returns. In a meeting with investors last month, Google CFO Patrick Pinchette said tax benefits of these projects can generate high returns.

"In order for us to invest in them they have to do very well from a returns perspective," Pinchette said.

Nathaniel Bullard, a solar analyst at Bloomberg New Energy Finance, estimates that these types of residential solar funds generate returns for the primary investor of well over 10 percent, and perhaps as high as 20 percent, including the value of the tax benefits.

Google – and solar installers – hope that this investment will inspire other corporations to establish similar funds.

"The number one constraint for the last few years has been the lack of project financing," said Lyndon Rive, CEO of SolarCity. "Once corporations start entering this space it will bring more affordable solar to millions of homes."

Jonathan Fahey can be reached at http://www.facebook.com/Fahey.Jonathan

.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST GREEN

NEW YORK — Google is making its largest investment yet in clean energy in an effort to help private homeowners put solar panels on their rooftops. The $280 million deal with installer SolarCity...
NEW YORK — Google is making its largest investment yet in clean energy in an effort to help private homeowners put solar panels on their rooftops. The $280 million deal with installer SolarCity...
Filed by Travis Donovan  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 249
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4  Next ›  Last »  (4 total)
09:08 AM on 07/11/2011
Dear mattamorr,

I appreciate your passion for solar, but don't appreciate the "comments" that my "rant is barely accurate" Do you live in New Jersey? Have you studied New Jersey's Energy Master Plan? Do you manage or broker NJ SRECs and understand the market dynamics? Have you read the SunRun contract for residents in New Jersey? Probably not. I have - and all of the points that I posted are documented in the above.

The SunRun lease sounds like a good program in CA. BUT, for residents of New Jersey, it's not as good. Some/Not all residential installations are $0.00 down. my house for instance which had an Azimuth of 108 degrees required a $3500 down payment.

Further, NJ has the richest Solar Renewable Energy Credit program in the country. Residents who have equity in their homes can basically leverage this program to pay for 100% of their system and make a profit off of the residual SRECs. Plus they can receive all the solar energy that the system can generate with no lease payment.

The NJ version of the lease calls has small print indicating that they have the right to increase the lease payment by 2.5% a year.

Also, why should NJ residents allow an out-of-state leasing company take ownership of their NJ funded SRECs (which the $0 down lease call for)? Since NJ rate payers are funding the program ---- shouldn't NJ based business and residents take advantage of them?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DaveRhodeIsland
Atheist, Hedonist, Liberal, SOB
06:39 PM on 06/21/2011
This is a wonderful thing! I think this is a very smart move on Google's part, as more and more of our energy will be from renewable sources in the very near future - like from today forward. The age of fossil fuel dominance is ending and we must embrace technologies like solar and wind if we want to have a habitable, sustainable planet.
11:05 AM on 06/20/2011
We must start somewhere. If Google is willing to help, more "power" to them.
09:01 AM on 06/17/2011
SCAM PART 3

What do you save: Assuming energy prices will continue to increase at the rate of 6.5% for the next 20 years the average price of energy will be about 32 cents. So if we subtract the lease fee from this, you will save an average of 12 cents per kWh per year times 20 years: so you save $14,400. But remember, that’s an average ---- you really only save a few dollars a month for the first few years.

So, the leasing company makes $82,550
You save $14,400

There is a much better way to go solar and keep the money that was intended for you. If you have equity in your home, and you want to go solar and want to save 4 times more than you can with a lease visit www.greensunnj.com to learn more.
09:01 AM on 06/17/2011
SCAM Part 2
Here is some simple math to consider:
The leasing company will make an average of $40,000 on the installation --- of which they pay a third party installer to complete the installation (and they don’t pay very well --- which means that the quality of the installation may suffer). Since the leasing company owns the equipment, they are entitled to depreciate it at an accelerated rate. So, let’s say the leasing company makes a 20% margin on the installation --- that’s $8,000.

In addition, the leasing company takes YOUR 30% (or $12,000) federal tax credit, which they may use themselves or sell to another company.

They take all of your Solar Renewable Energy Certificates --- on an average sized 6KW system that generates 6 SRECs a year in New Jersey at an average sell price of $455 over 15 years that’s $40,950 out of your pocket.

PLUS, they are charging you a monthly lease. For simplicity sake, let’s say the lease payment is 18 cents (with the annual increase) per kWh and your system generates 6,000 kWh for the 20 year lease term, they make an additional $21,600 in leasing fees.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DaveRhodeIsland
Atheist, Hedonist, Liberal, SOB
06:40 PM on 06/21/2011
I think you mean SPAM part 2.
06:48 PM on 06/21/2011
Actually, it's time that someone educates the residential homeowners that leasing solar is just lining the pockets of the leasing companies with SRECs (cash) from other states.
01:20 AM on 07/11/2011
Your rant is just barely accurate. There are so many flaws in your comments and opinions and so little space for rebuttal.
Yes, historically, electricity rates have risen an average of 6.5% a year, but here in Southern California the average kWh rates in the most expensive and "unregulated" tiers have increased over 50% since 2008! My SunRun system is designed to knock-out those expensive (I'll say it again) "unregulated" kWh rate tiers while keeping the lower priced and regulated prices with my utility company. I paid $0 out of pocket for my system. I have a 0% yearly escalator to the .25 fixed kWh rate I'm charged by my solar provider. The average rate I was paying before solar was .26 kWh and it is now, just two years later at .28 kWh. SunRun monitors, warranties, insures and maintains my system for the next 20 years. I started saving $ immediately and saving even more as time goes by. Where's the down-side?
09:00 AM on 06/17/2011
WAKE UP AND SMELL THE SCAM!

Is anyone familiar with the term “There is no free lunch”? Guess what, there is no such thing as free solar either! Think about this ---

Why would a leasing company (which is basically a bank) give you anything for free? The reason --- they are receiving all of the benefits that the federal and state government intended to go to you – the taxpaying homeowner or small business owner. Further, they are taking state funds out of state in the case of Sun Run and Sungevity (both California based leasing companies) – Why would New Jersey stand for this? Our ratepayers and taxpaying citizens are helping them make boatloads of money off of us!
07:40 AM on 06/16/2011
The majority of low-income households do not to own their own home and often lack the option of putting solar panels on their apartment/rental. Not only that, the article states that most people choose to finance their system. Low-income households are up against the wall, with less individuals employed in their household, those who are employed are working more for less, and they're already up to their eyeballs in debt- no credit available for them to also take on a rooftop photovoltaic lease.

Rooftop photovoltaic, as stated in the article, is only a worthwhile venture when a combination of high electric costs, low-installation cost, and of course federal and state subsidies are present. And only for properly sunny properties.

So only land owners with a nice sunny piece of property, along with taxpayer subsidies, can really use this service. Much like in the days when only land owners could vote, and Negroes only counted 3/5...

Rooftop photovoltaic is not currently available to the average low-income household, with or without Google backing solar leasing programs. These programs increase access to middle-income households, but poor people still have no options for their home to be reliably powered by user-owned renewable sources.

Developing rooftop photovoltaics into a cheaper option overall in energy costs for rental property owners would be a better focus in spreading access of renewable energy to low-income households.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DaveRhodeIsland
Atheist, Hedonist, Liberal, SOB
06:41 PM on 06/21/2011
John, it's a start. You can't start with catering to those who can't afford it.
photo
rodjard
I Update my brain frequently
02:53 AM on 06/16/2011
We ned a Wikileaks type bombshell on Military energy
research. Does anyony doubt that there is one to be
found?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nirek
Proud progressive Vietnam vet. against WAR
09:23 PM on 06/15/2011
I love my solar array! It makes 120% of the power I use!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Mikeeee
Private corps can't do it better!!!
10:08 AM on 06/15/2011
I stand to be corrected but it would seem to me, that because of the nature of the panels being dark, they'd be absorbing heat, couldn't some of that heat be captured to provide hot water for washing dishes, clothes, showering etc?
Would be a nice supplemental source if possible.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dragontech
Looking for a good micro-brew
01:26 PM on 06/15/2011
Not sure if that would work like that, but bears testing, if you know someone with a solar set up, or have one yourself. However, solar hot water systems are cheaper and easier than photovoltaic already. Easy enough to have both.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mjt218
07:04 PM on 06/15/2011
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2009/12/the-next-solar-frontier-producing-more-energy-with-hybrid-pvthermal-systems

It's happening. Traditionally solar is either to capture thermal energy or to excite electrons.
08:46 AM on 06/15/2011
Here in the southwest solar provides about 99.5% of our home's electricity. It could make a huge, huge impact to the region if it were not for subsidized coal.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dragontech
Looking for a good micro-brew
01:32 PM on 06/15/2011
Where in the southwest are you? When I lived in Tucson, up until last September, there was very little solar in evidence. On my block, one house had an old solar hot water tank on the roof, and one had four solar panels, just enough to cut electric costs, not run on it. With the intense sun 300 days a year solar should run 100% of local electricity, instead of the coal/natural gas plant that is there, plus provide electricity for the surrounding area. I wish that solar was a requirement for construction in the desert.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nirek
Proud progressive Vietnam vet. against WAR
09:25 PM on 06/15/2011
I'm in Vermont and as I said before my array makes 120% of mine.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dragontech
Looking for a good micro-brew
03:50 AM on 06/15/2011
DAYUM! Makes me wish I owned a home, rather than rent a dang apartment.
photo
JWerner
Beware Macduff; beware the thane of Fife!
06:14 AM on 06/15/2011
Talk with the landlord, see if he/she is even open to ideas about installing solar power onto the apartment buildings. Encourage solar wherever and whenever you can, I say.
10:54 PM on 06/14/2011
Thank you, Google.
fuzzychickens
The higher the power, the bigger the lies
10:28 PM on 06/14/2011
Drop in the bucket compared to 17 billion wasted on ethanol subsidies over 4 years.

Oil, coal, and natural gas companies would rather us waste money like that than fund solar - esp residential solar.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wsmith3023
Dems and Reps are two sides of the same coin
09:57 AM on 06/15/2011
The US Government owns most of the Oil, coal and natural gas in the US.
The US Government doesn't own the sun.
The US Government heavily taxes oil, coal and natural gas products.
The US Government cannot tax individual solar panels, except maybe once when you buy it.
photo
drp103
SYSTEM ON
08:37 PM on 06/14/2011
We the People will some day be in majority control of the power grid.
fuzzychickens
The higher the power, the bigger the lies
10:32 PM on 06/14/2011
Then the oil companies will launch a space umbrella to block out the sun and charge us for light.
09:39 AM on 06/15/2011
That will be the birth of the Umbrella Corporation. ^^